Acceptance and rejection decisions are made by each journal's editors on scholarly merit alone, independent of commercial considerations. Our role as publisher is to provide the editorial infrastructure, production, and long-term upkeep a journal needs — editorial judgment on individual submissions rests with the journal's own editors and peer reviewers, not with Global Panacea as a business.

Every journal we manage uses double-blind peer review: the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the process. Each manuscript is evaluated by a minimum of two independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise before an editorial decision is made.

Reviewers are required to declare any conflicts of interest and to recuse themselves from handling a manuscript where one exists. Editorial decisions, once made, are final.

All articles we publish are freely available to read immediately upon publication, with no reader-side paywall. Content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license — authors retain copyright of their own work, and readers are free to share and adapt it with attribution.

We charge no article processing charges (APCs) or submission fees to authors.

Authors submitting to any journal we manage must ensure their work is original, not previously published elsewhere, and not under simultaneous consideration by another journal or outlet. Every listed author must have genuinely contributed to the work.

Journal of Management Prospective (JMP), our founding journal, adheres to the guidelines and best practices established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in its editorial process. As we launch further journals, each will follow the same ethics framework.

Studies involving human participants must comply with the Declaration of Helsinki and applicable national and institutional regulations; authors are required to document informed consent and provide an ethics-committee approval reference where relevant.

Authors using AI or AI-assisted writing tools must disclose that use in the manuscript's Methods or Acknowledgements section. AI tools cannot be listed as authors, and the corresponding author remains fully responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of the submitted work.

All submitted manuscripts are screened with plagiarism-detection software before review. Similarity exceeding 20% of the manuscript text (excluding references and quotations) may result in a revision request or rejection without further review. Reuse of a significant portion of an author's own previously published work without proper citation is treated as self-plagiarism under the same standard.

Where plagiarism is confirmed after publication, the article is retracted following COPE's retraction guidelines. Retracted articles remain accessible but are clearly marked as retracted, and retain their original DOI and bibliographic metadata. Significant but non-retraction-level errors receive a formal correction notice linked to the original article.

Authors must disclose any financial, personal, or professional relationships that could reasonably be seen to influence their work, including funding sources, employment, and competing academic interests; disclosures are published alongside the article. Editors and reviewers are held to the same standard and must recuse themselves from manuscripts where a conflict exists.

If you have a concern about research integrity, editorial conduct, or a possible breach of any policy on this page, contact us directly — see the Contact page — or, for a specific journal, its own editorial contact listed on that journal's site.